Production of biotechnological substances is a complex process, even more so when the desired product is a combination of molecules encoded by different genes, such as a multimeric protein formed from two or more different polypeptides. Successful coexpression of multiple gene products requires overcoming a number of challenges, which are compounded by the simultaneous expression of more than one gene product. Problems that must be overcome include creating compatible expression vectors when more than one type of vector is used; obtaining the correct stoichiometric ratio of products; producing gene products that are folded correctly and in the proper conformation with respect to binding partners; purifying the desired products away from cells and unwanted proteins, such as proteins that are folded incorrectly and/or are in an incorrect conformation; and minimizing the formation of inclusion bodies, as one aspect of maximizing the yield of the desired product(s). Many different approaches have been taken to address these challenges, but there is still a need for better coexpression methods.
Several inducible bacterial protein expression systems, including plasmids containing the lac and ara promoters, have been devised to express individual proteins. These systems have limited utility in the coexpression of difficult-to-express proteins as they fail to induce protein homogenously within the entire growth culture population in wild-type E. coli (Khlebnikov and Keasling, “Effect of lacY expression on homogeneity of induction from the Ptac and Ptrc promoters by natural and synthetic inducers”, Biotechnol Prog 2002 May-June; 18(3): 672-674). When expression of the transport proteins for inducers is dependent on the presence of inducer, as is the case for wild-type E. coli lac and ara systems, the cellular concentration of the inducer must reach a threshold level to initiate the production of transport proteins, but once that threshold has been reached, an uncontrolled positive feedback loop can occur, with the result being a high level of inducer in the cell and correspondingly high levels of expression from inducible promoters: the “all-or-none” phenomenon. Increasing the concentration of the inducer in the growth medium increases the proportion of cells in the population that are in high-expression mode. Although this type of system results in concentration-dependent induction of protein expression at the population scale, it is suboptimal for expression and production of proteins that require tight control of expression, including those that are toxic, have poor solubility, or require specific concentrations for other reasons.
Some efforts have been made to address the “all-or-none” induction phenomenon in single-promoter expression systems, by eliminating inducer-dependent transport of the inducer. One example is having a null mutation in the lactose permease gene (lacYam) and using an alternate inducer of the lac promoter such as IPTG (isopropyl-thio-β-D-galactoside), which can get through the cell membrane to some degree in the absence of a transporter (Jensen et al., “The use of lac-type promoters in control analysis”, Eur J Biochem 1993 Jan. 15; 211(1-2): 181-191). Another approach is the use of an arabinose-inducible promoter in a strain deficient in the arabinose transporter genes, but with a mutation in the lactose permease gene, lacY(A117C), that allows it to transport arabinose into the cell (Morgan-Kiss et al., “Long-term and homogeneous regulation of the Escherichia coli araBAD promoter by use of a lactose transporter of relaxed specificity”, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002 May 28; 99(11): 7373-7377).
The components of individual protein expression systems are often incompatible, precluding their use in coexpression systems, as they may be adversely affected by ‘crosstalk’ effects between different inducer-promoter systems, or require mutually exclusive genomic modifications, or be subject to general metabolic regulation. An attempt to address the ‘crosstalk’ problem between the lac and ara inducible promoter systems included directed evolution of the AraC transcriptional activator to improve its ability to induce the araBAD promoter in the presence of IPTG, an inducer of the lac promoter (Lee et al., “Directed evolution of AraC for improved compatibility of arabinose- and lactose-inducible promoters”, Appl Environ Microbiol 2007 September; 73(18): 5711-5715; Epub 2007 Jul. 20). However, the compatibility between expression vectors based on ara and lac inducible promoters is still limited due to the requirement for mutually exclusive genomic modifications: a lacY point mutation (lacY(A117C)) for homogenous induction of the araBAD promoter by arabinose, and a null lacY gene for homogenous induction of the lac promoter by IPTG. General metabolic regulation—for example, carbon catabolite repression (CCR)—can also affect the compatibility of inducible promoters. CCR is characterized by the repression of genes needed for utilization of a carbon-containing compound when a more preferred compound is present, as seen in the preferential use of glucose before other sugars. In the case of the ara and prp inducible promoter systems, the presence of arabinose reduces the ability of propionate to induce expression from the prpBCDE promoter, an effect believed to involve CCR (Park et al., “The mechanism of sugar-mediated catabolite repression of the propionate catabolic genes in Escherichia coli”, Gene 2012 Aug. 1; 504(1): 116-121, Epub 2012 May 3). There is clearly a need for an inducible coexpression system that overcomes these problems.